Via you-know-who, politicalprof gets down to what is really wrong:
Third, it was perfectly clear 10 years ago that it would be very contentious, politically, to let the Bush tax cuts “expire.” It was perfectly clear that, in 2011 (or 2010, as it happened), Republicans would scream that failure to extend the Bush tax cuts would mean imposing the giantest most horrificest and business crushingest tax increases on “the American people” in US history. In 2001, Republicans hoped they would be able to extend the tax cuts going forward after 10 years; Democrats hoped that they would have enough to votes to let the cuts expire. Both parties kicked the can down the road 10 years. The Republicans were on the winning side of that decision.
So, in the end, I don’t think the Bush tax cuts were scheduled to expire in 10 years to help future Americans pay for things like their parents’ and grandparents’ retirements and health care. I think they were scheduled to expire in ten years in the cynical hope that they would keep being extended afterwards.
That’s what I thought 10 years ago, and I have seen nothing to the contrary to change my mind since.
The Bush tax cuts cost about $2.5 trillion so far and they’ll continue to cost money until they are ended (which may never happen). The wars cost another $2 trillion. Combined, that accounts for about a third of the total US debt.
Bush was foisted off on us by Very Serious People who thought Al Gore sighed too much to be president (go read the Daily Howler if you don’t understand how this happened). These same people — who now relentlessly fear-monger about the debt — did nothing to oppose the Bush tax cuts and cheered the wars.
chopper
now add in medicare part D and the loss in revenues from the recession, which add up to probably another 1.5 trillion at this point.
kd bart
The Bush Presidency is the lousy Christmas gift that keeps on giving. Once you’re stuck with it, you can never quite get rid of it.
beltane
This country really needs to undergo some kind of intellectual revolution if we are to have any hope of improving our lot. Instead of the banality of evil, we are being hamstrung by the evil of banality. A de-Villagification of the media would be the best thing that could ever happen to us.
chopper
@kd bart:
i’d use herpes, but yeah.
MikeBoyScout
So, you’re saying you feel like K-Thug?
Welcome to a very large demographic.
beltane
@kd bart: My mother once brought over a pinata full of that plastic Easter grass. For years, no matter how thoroughly we vacuumed and swept, that plastic grass would appear in the strangest of places. The Bush administration is like that plastic grass.
Villago Delenda Est
Via “you-know-who”?
He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named is blogging from King’s Cross station?
Dennis SGMM
@kd bart:
And the ME wars are that fruitcake that everyone keeps passing around because no one has the stones to simply get rid of the thing.
General Stuck
And as an anecdote to the surreality of it all, that I cannot get out my head for the sheer amateurishness of the winger clown car convention — was the unreal House vote on the debt deal, that Boehner called for without having the votes of enough goopers to pass it.
And at the last moment goes hat in hand begging Pelosi for rescuing his incompetent ass with dem votes. That just blows my mind, every time I think about it
Lawguy
If it was the Very Serious People who foisted Bush and the Bush tax cuts on us. It is also those same Very Serious People who keep them from being repealed, not the average voter. It is a democratic congress not just republicans who make sure that they are never repealed.
There is a currently a stranglehold on America, and those that have the hold are the insane republicans and the feckless democrats who are scared of their own shadows.
Bush presented himself as a moderate republican and people could see no difference between a moderate republican and a Clinton democrat. Bush lied and stole and the democratic party did nothing to fight back. We vote and completely repudiate republican or what we think are republican policies and they democrats come in and find themselves unwilling to stand up to any crazy republican who happens to be screaming loud enough to get on TV.
This is the end of empire and the little bit of representative democracy that was left when Clinton was prez.
Jewish Steel
@beltane:
My hope is that will be yet another benefit of the demographic shift over the next 20 years or so. I don’t think young people get their news from traditional sources. I’m hardly young and I certainly don’t anymore.
(I’m not stalking you from thread to thread, btw, you’ve just made some good observations. Honest!)
jwb
@Villago Delenda Est: I had that thought as well…
malraux
The 10 year limit on the tax cuts is the perfect republican strategy. It gives the r’s something to constantly campaign on (we’ve got to get re-elected because the renewal is coming up), it lets them frame democrats as tax raisers, and as importantly, it also sucks all the attention up from working on government to get it doing something else because we have to constantly renegotiate the tax cuts.
gene108
I thought tax cuts were set to expire in 10 years because whatever parliamentary procedure was used to pass it has a rule that causes any budget measure that has a negative impact on the debt to expire in 10 years.
The Clinton 1993 budget was passed in a similar manner, but since it didn’t cause the debt to increase, it could’ve continued indefinitely.
danimal
Damnit, Obama, let them expire. ALL OF THEM. I’ll pay, gladly, to give my kids a future in a functional America. The middle class will have to pony up. Don’t fcuk up the message by splitting the difference.
LET THEM ALL EXPIRE.
Samara Morgan
@danimal: he is going to. the timeline of the election and the second tranche of the debt ceiling(dec 23 2012) are designed to give Obama the power to do just that. The cuts expire automatically on Jan 1 2013. He may be able to save the middleclass cuts, depending on on the ground game.
i dont really think he should.
3.6 trillion would go a long way to making up the 4.4 trillion of war debt Bush incurred.
bourbaki
Dude, the 10 year thing was so that the tax cuts could be passed via reconciliation (the Dems were going to filibuster it). I think to get around the Byrd(?) amendment.
ppcli
@gene108: If I recall correctly, the tax cuts were in fact passed through reconciliation. That is what required the 10 year limit. (Byrd rule.)
You remember reconciliation – that’s the procedure that the Republicans called Communist shove-it-down-my-throat antidemocratic tyranny when the Democrats used it to pass health care reform.
Barter is Better because...
I don’t see how the Dems retain the senate in ’12. The TP will control 2/3 of the gov’t provided Obama gets re-elected which is no sure thing with a stagnat economy and double digit unemployment. The generational shift is coming too late. Stick a fork in the republic, it is undone. Time to think about the rebuilding the Union.
FlipYrWhig
My prediction is that the “Bush tax cuts” per se are allowed to lapse, but are replaced by the product of a “tax reform” commission that lowers rates while cutting loopholes and eliminating deductions. It will have the effect of preserving or even improving the tax liability of the 98% of households that make $250K or less, but it won’t be tied to anything that can be identified with “Bush,” and it will be a bit harder to demagogue as “the largest tax increase in history,” although the Republicans won’t give up trying.
danimal
@Samara Morgan: I agree that Obama plans to let them expire. But he keeps sticking to saving the ‘middle class’ portion of the tax rates. These middle class tax cuts are poorly targeted (IOW, the rich get a huge benefit out of them), they muddy up the messaging and they create an “out” for Blue Dogs and persuadable Republicans. Let them expire and then pass a better targeted plan to give middle class families tax relief.
My congressional action plan for Dems (it’s very achievable):
1. Draw a bright line in the sand that the Bush tax deferral plan is unaffordable and they need to expire.
2. Argue, posture and preen for the cameras.
3. Meet with Republicans, repeat #1 and #2.
4. Seriously consider Republican counter-proposal.
5. Repeat steps 1 and 2.
6. Pass December 31, 2012 without agreeing to anything.
You can do it, Dems!
MikeBoyScout
Just think what might have happened in 2000 had Al Gore, while eating a jelly donut, promised to put both Joe Lieberman and the Republican leadership in a lock box for 10 years.
danimal
The Bush tax cuts were passed via reconciliation in order to avoid accounting for their true costs. It was always the plans of the GOP to make them permanent. About the time that the GOP was ramping up their BS marketing campaign for their extension, a little hurricane name Katrina hit the small town of New Orleans. That’s one of the few good things that came out of Hurricane Katrina.
Dr. Squid
First of all, what [email protected] said. Secondly, they expected to have the majority in perpetuity. You could even call it an entitlement.
jwb
@Dr. Squid: If it wasn’t for ACORN, you know, they would have. At least, that’s what my TV tells me.
Samara Morgan
@danimal: i agree!
AMG that feels good.
i hardly ever get to do that here.
becca
@kd bart: The Roberts Court for another 30 years… words fail.
Kane
Timeline of Events Via Steve Benen: http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal/2011_08/a_timeline_of_events031362.php
1980: Ronald Reagan runs for president, promising a balanced budget
1981 – 1989: With support from congressional Republicans, Reagan runs enormous deficits, adds $2 trillion to the debt.
1993: Bill Clinton passes economic plan that lowers deficit, gets zero votes from congressional Republicans.
1998: U.S. deficit disappears for the first time in three decades. Debt clock is unplugged.
2000: George W. Bush runs for president, promising to maintain a balanced budget.
2001: CBO shows the United States is on track to pay off the entirety of its national debt within a decade.
2001 – 2009: With support from congressional Republicans, Bush runs enormous deficits, adds nearly $5 trillion to the debt.
2002: Dick Cheney declares, “Deficits don’t matter.” Congressional Republicans agree, approving tax cuts, two wars, and Medicare expansion without even trying to pay for them.
2009: Barack Obama inherits $1.3 trillion deficit from Bush; Republicans immediately condemn Obama’s fiscal irresponsibility.
2009: Congressional Democrats unveil several domestic policy initiatives — including health care reform, cap and trade, DREAM Act — which would lower the deficit. GOP opposes all of them, while continuing to push for deficit reduction.
September 2010: In Obama’s first fiscal year, the deficit shrinks by $122 billion. Republicans again condemn Obama’s fiscal irresponsibility.
October 2010: S&P endorses the nation’s AAA rating with a stable outlook, saying the United States looks to be in solid fiscal shape for the foreseeable future.
November 2010: Republicans win a U.S. House majority, citing the need for fiscal responsibility.
December 2010: Congressional Republicans demand extension of Bush tax cuts, relying entirely on deficit financing. GOP continues to accuse Obama of fiscal irresponsibility.
March 2011: Congressional Republicans declare intention to hold full faith and credit of the United States hostage — a move without precedent in American history — until massive debt-reduction plan is approved.
July 2011: Obama offers Republicans a $4 trillion debt-reduction deal. GOP refuses, pushes debt-ceiling standoff until the last possible day, rattling international markets.
August 2011: S&P downgrades U.S. debt, citing GOP refusal to consider new revenues. Republicans rejoice and blame Obama for fiscal irresponsibility.
Rhoda
The President won’t say boo about letting the middle class tax cuts expire along with those for the rich; it would break his campaign pledge. He’s going to campaign on those tax cuts and then he’s going to see the Congress if he’s re-elected; if he can’t get the tax cuts for the middle class he’s going to let them all expire and blame the Republicans.
That tees up a tax debate for the first hundred days of his second term and real reform.
That’ll make health care reform look like a walk in the park.
harlana
hilarious in a heartbreaking sort of way
Brachiator
@FlipYrWhig:
Interesting prediction, but so far every tax proposal on the table, apart from Obama’s outline, extends benefits for wealthy taxpayers and big corporations, and eliminates middle class deductions, in effect also eliminating the middle class. This includes plans favored by Democrats in the Gang Of Six.
And now the conservatives will be able to buttress their arguments with claims that the need to get spending under control makes gutting of middle class deductions necessary.
What is even crazier is that some of these ideas get support from progressives, such as the idea that the mortgage interest deduction is an unfair loophole, because all real proletarian Americans should live in rent controlled apartment buildings.
harlana
At this point, I don’t give a shit what smarter people think of the S&P, this is getting a lot of airplay, accurate or not, that is going to scare people and we know from FoxNews how powerful fear can be for lizard brains.
And, as a BJ commenter so eloquently suggested, the turd should be laid in the lap of republicans alone. However the media wants to present it, this, and how we plan to fix a broken economy, if only they would cooperate, but take a look at these guys and how they are behaving, wanting to wreck an already ravaged economy. It’s not about compromise anymore, it’s about beating your opponent bloody about the head with basic Democratic values that most Americans agree with, and which lie in stark contrast to republican fantasies of tax cuts creating jobs
You don’t have to be shrill, but you can be relentless in your message, esp. when you have nothing to lose. Compromise cannot be the language of the day, not anymore.
cleek
@General Stuck:
and Pelosi helped him! that kinda shocked me.
but it’s still Obama’s fault.
Brachiator
@Jewish Steel:
As far as I can tell, nontraditional sources are either mainstream sources with new tech gloss, or gossip. Where I work, people under 30 spend a ton of time on entertainment news and pass on political and economic urban legends that come to them via chain emails, such as a recent one claiming that the US never had a deficit one hundred years ago when there were supposedly far fewer taxes.
Worse, except for occasional ventures into Wikipedia, there are many young people, and quite a few older ones, who absolutely refuse to research or double check news stories, relying on brand name sites and their social network to tell them all they need to know.
Three-nineteen
Shocking – Sully endorses someone who says “both sides did it”! Democrats kicked the can down the road by not voting for it, forcing the Republicans to pass it via reconciliation.
daveNYC
@Barter is Better because…: By rebuld the republic you actually mean flee the country, right? Because the teabagger set will make this place unlivable.
gnomedad
@kd bart:
Can we put it back in the attic now that Ronaldus Maximus is dead?
Svensker
@ DougJ
But did he turn up his radio?
mb
I’ve seen this post from Politicalprof echoed around the blogosphere today and I can’t figure out why it is seen as so incisive. As others in the comments above have mentioned, there was a clear reason why the Bush tax cuts were sunsetted. I’m sure the republicans wanted then and now to extend them indefinitely but that is not why they expired after 10 years (not to mention the fact that “sunsetting them because they wanted to extend them” makes no sense.) They expired because they blew such a huge hole in the budget that they didn’t comply with existing budgeting law and could not be permanent.
IMO, the post from politicalprof might get at the desires of the GOP but it garbles the history and obscures the fact that it was known at the time that the Bush tax cuts were going to balloon the deficit.
JWL
I would add only this: Obama decision to postpone the cuts expiration to coincide with his 2012 re-election bid was a cynical decision that backfired.
Polling indicated a majority of Americans approving of a roll back; democrats controlled both houses; and, above all, it was the right thing to do. The president nonetheless chose to defer the issue for the most selfish of political reasons.
There are those who will counter that congressional democrats would not have risen to the call. They might well be right. But so what? It’s a bankrupt justification invoked by timid partisans. Any democrat unwilling to stand on that momentous issue deserved to fall, and be replaced by an unalloyed republican. A vote would have separated the goats from the sheep. The party would today be stronger for it, because its dead weight would have been cut adrift.
karen marie
@cleek: But that’s the thing — Boehner didn’t go to Pelosi, “hat in hand” or otherwise, when it was clear he didn’t have the votes, he just threw up his hands and left it to Democrats to get the additional needed votes without being asked. Boehner apparently doesn’t understand that the job of Leader of the House is different than Majority Leader.
@mb: I didn’t go read the whole thing at the link, but if politicalprof made that basic, very critical mistake, then nothing else he says on the subject should be taken seriously, imho.
MattT
Any Teabagger / RedState jackass who tries to defelct blame from their heroes needs to have this Anderson Cooper transcript shoved in their face. interview with john Chambers, head of sovereign ratings at S&P (who would seem like a knowledgable source on why the US lost its AAA:
Anderson Cooper had John Chambers, head of sovereign ratings at S&P, on last night:
“COOPER: Why did S&P downgrade the United States’ credit rating today?
CHAMBERS: Well, I think there were two reasons. The first reason is the one that you’ve outlined, being our view of the political settings in the United States have been altered. We’ve taken them down a notch, the rating down a notch. The political brinkmanship we saw over raising the debt ceiling was something that was really beyond our expectations, the U.S. government getting to the last day before they had cash management problems…”
In other words, the fact that the Tea Party caucus and GOP in general used the debt ceiling as a political hostage was the primary reason for the downgrade.
Transcript: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1108/05/acd.02.html
Also Chambers, in response to a question on how the US can regain its AAA rating:
“But I think a key debate will be coming up regarding the extension of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, because if you did let them lapse for the high-income earners, that could give you another $950 billion….”
In other words, S&P feels we have both spending AND REVENUE PROBLEMS.
So, yeah. Thanks John Boehner and the Tea Party Caucus.
General Stuck
@karen marie:
You are correct that Boehner didn’t go directly to Pelosi for dem votes, he instead went the media to lay blame on her if the bill didn’t end up passing with dem votes.
Chickenshit Speaker of the House.
The Worst Person In the World
And yet Mr. Obama treats these frauds as legitimate negotiating partners, aggressively seeks “bipartisan” engagement with them, capitulates to almost all their demands, and hails them as patriots.
Funny, that…gee, I wonder whose side he’s on?
jayackroyd
Just for the record, they had to expire them to get a score from the CBO that would permit them to use reconciliation.
cleek
@The Worst Person In the World:
their legitimacy is conferred by the positions they hold. it’s how our fucking government works. the US president is not some motherfucking third world dictator who can rewrite the constitution on the fly. he has his powers, and Boehner, as Speaker, has maybe even more power when it comes to legislation. that’s the way it is. it’s reality.
someguy
The lesson is pretty clear. No tax cuts – ever! The Democrats in the senate are assholes for having accepted this albatross around the country’s neck. That’s what they get for not using the filibuster.
Jenny
…. and by the Naderites who insisted there was “no difference between Bush and Gore.”
Jenny
@someguy:
They couldn’t use the filibuster. The GOP passed the Bush tax cuts via the budget reconciliation method, and the budget is the only item not subject to the filibuster.
Jenny
People on the left have to take some responsibility for the all the shit Bush created.
Al Gore would never have blown up the budget with trillion in trickle down tax cuts and he would never have invaded Iraq.
I also believe 9/11 would never have happened based on Richard Clarke’s and George Tenet’s books on how the Bush people refused to act on their warnings of an impending spectacular attack (it’s as if the Bushies wanted an incident to occur).
Al Gore was far from perfect, but it was a gross lie to say there was no difference between him and Bush. And for spreading such gross false propaganda, the Naderties are coupable for the disaster that ensued.
Jenny
@JWL:
This is a myth and you’re contradicting yourself.
He extended the cuts in return for unemployment insurance, a payroll tax holiday, votes on START treaty, DADT, and a landmark food saftey bill.
You can say he didn’t get enough in return(but that’s easy to say if you’re not gay and have never had to serve in terror of being dishonorably discharged), but it’s false to say he only did it for electoral purposes. After all, as you state in your argument, polls showed ending the tax cut would have been a popular political move.
You have come up with a better conspiracy theory.
ruemara
Reading people blame things on “feckless dems refusing to filibuster” and “which side is Obama on because he actually deals with those republicans”, I have to wonder. Shouldn’t a key hallmark of the left–the reality based community–be actually knowing what happened, not just repeating what you’d like to believe? It’s something I’ve noticed on lefty media sites and damn, I wish it would change.
bob h
It was ten years because that is the limit when you legislate by budget reconciliation, which is how Bush got them thru in the first place.